The Creative Woman

fheCreati\)e^oman

Quarterly

L±A

Winter 1983

WOMEN IN LAW

From Law School To The United States Supreme Court

The
, Creatine
Sa)oman

A quarterly, Governors State University, Park Forest South, IL 60466

Vol. 6, No. 2 Winter 1983

Published under the auspices of the Provost's Office, © Governors State University and Helen Hughes ISSN 0736-4733

STAFF

Helen E. Hughes, Editor
Lynn Thomas Strauss, Managing Editor
Joan Lewis, Editorial Consultant
Suzanne Oliver, Art Director

Leone Giroux Middleton, Graphic Designer
Joanne R. Creager, Consultant Editor

ADVISORY COUNCIL

Donna Bandstra, Social Sciences

Margaret Brady, Journalism

Rev. Ellen Dohner, Religion

Rita Durrant, League of American Penwomen

Ann Gerhart, Women's Networking

Harriet Gross, Sociology/Woman's Studies

Helene Guttman, Biological Sciences

Mimi Kaplan, Library Resources

Young Kim, Communications Science

Harriet Marcus Gross, Journalism

Elizabeth Ohm, Library Resources

Betye Saar, Fine Arts

Sara Shumer, Political Theory

Emily Wasiolek, Literature

Rev. Elmer Witt, Campus Ministries

Table of contents

Page

Section I

Section III

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: 4

Making History

by Lynn Thomas Strauss
Domestic Violence 11

by Judge Susan Gende
For The Prosecution 14

by Laura Schilling, J.D.
Annotated Bibliography 15

prepared by Joanne Creager

Letters to The Editor
The Donor, a story

by Carol Amen
Growing Up In Alaska

by Margaret S. Hughes
and June S . Dona
Announc ement s
State Of The Quarterly,
Editor's Column

34
35

41

Section II

Lawyerbane 16

A Poem by Joanne Creager

Portrait of The Lawyer As Artist 17
by Susan J. Martin

Afloat Again 19

A poem by Sue Saniel Elkind

I Was a Law School Wife 20

by Cynthia J. Lee
Portrait of a Professional 25

by Joanne Creager
"This is no way to Live...": 27

Women Law Students Look at
The Law School Experience

by Jullie A. Norman
The Women in Ward C 31

A poem by Sue Saniel Elkind

Interview with an Attorney 32

by Lynn Thomas Strauss

This issue was typed on the Lexitron
word processor by Phyllis Rich.

The Creative Woman is a quarterly
published by Governors State University.
We focus on a special topic in each
issue, presented from a feminist
perspective. We celebrate the creative
achievements of women in many fields
and appeal to inquiring minds. We
publish fiction, poetry, book reviews,
articles, photography and original
graphics .

INTRODUCTION

When wise Portia stood in the Vene-
tian courtroom to cry "The quality of
mercy is not strained. It droppeth as
the gentle rain from heaven upon the
place beneath," it was rare anomaly to
see a woman as an officer of the court.
In the centuries since Shakespeare
praised the virtues of Portia, women
have continued to be largely excluded
from the practice of the law, until
relatively recent years. Now women
approach 50% of incoming law school
students.

The experience has been generally
agreed to be a "mind-bender" as one of
our writers has described it. If Pro-
fessor Kingsfield's words strike terror
("You come in here with your heads full
of mush and you leave thinking like a
lawyer.") women have experienced it with
a special jolt, it would appear. We have
a woman sitting on the highest bench in
the land. Others, having studied law,
become painters. Some, as the author of
"Lawyerbane," are left with a profound
distaste for the system and the cynical
ones who practice it.

Joanne Creager, our consultant
editor for this issue, is an attorney
working as legislative assistant for
Wohl, Cinnamon, Hagedorn and Dunbar Law
Corporations in Sacramento, California,
a public interest lobbying group. She
received her J.D. degree from Southwest-
ern University School of Law in 1978 and
an M.A. in English from Loyola Univer-
sity of Los Angeles in 1973.

Joanne provided the initial enthu-
siastic spark for this issue and has
contributed her expertise as well as
support. As a charter subscriber to
The Creative Woman, she was eager to
serve in an editorial capacity. Her
insights as a mover in the real/unreal
world of the state legislature and her
sensitivity to the effects of the ro-
manticization of law as a profession
have added significant dimensions to
this issue.

Among the many aspects of the topic
which we have not been able to include
are: the place of gender in the court-
room, women as defendants, as witnesses,
and laws that affect women. In Kim
Keegan's letter and in Carol Amen's hor-
rific short story, "The Donor," we point
to what is fast becoming an issue of
overriding concern — biomedical ethics.

SECTION 1

JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR:
MAKING HISTORY

by Lynn Thomas Strauss

With the appointment of Sandra Day
O'Connor as the first woman to sit on
the Supreme Court of the United States,
a central issue comes under considera-
tion. Does her appointment represent a
basic acceptance of women of achievement
into one of the highest seats of power
in our government, or is this merely a
token appointment, unaccompanied by any
change in attitude by the male power
structure?

Also to be considered here is the
issue of evaluating the effects of a
woman's presence on the Supreme Court
bench. Will a new point of view or a
different sensibility be felt in de-
liberations or written opinions?

The first Supreme Court appointed
by George Washington in 1790 consisted
of six justices. Each was white, male,
and protestant.

The first Catholic member, Roger
Taney, was appointed by Andrew Jackson
in 1836. The first Jewish Justice was
Louis Brandeis, appointed by Woodrow
Wilson in 1916. The first Black Jus-
tice, Thurgood Marshalljwas appointed
by Lyndon Johnson in 1967 and the first
female Justice, Sandra Day O'Connor was
appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1981.

The current Supreme Court of the
United States seats one black, one
Catholic, one woman, and six white
male protestants.

President Reagan's selection in
September 1981 of Sandra Day O'Connor
to fill the vacancy on the Supreme
Court since 1975 was generally regarded
as politically astute. His selection
won the endorsement of Senators ranging
ideologically from conservative Barry
Goldwater, Republican of Arizona to
liberal Teddy Kennedy, Democrat of
Massachusetts. To avoid further ali-

enation of women's rights advocates
during his campaign for presidency,
Ronald Reagan had pledged he would fill
"one of the first Supreme Court vacan-
cies" by appointment of "the most quali-
fied woman."

While 51-year old Mrs. O'Connor is
described by friend and foe alike to be
notably bright, extremely hard working,
meticulous, deliberate, cautious and
above all, a Republican conservative
with a reputation for excellence, she
received only a qualified endorsement
from the American Bar Association. The
Association noted that she lacked exten-
sive court experience but did meet "the
highest standards of judicial tempera-
ment and integrity and had the required
professional qualifications."

Most observers agree that she lacks
federal judicial experience. The Nation
in a July 25, 1981 editorial comments
that Mrs. O'Connor was chosen almost en-
tirely because of her sex rather than
individual merit. She was not, says The
Nation, an exceptional lawyer, nor is
she an outstanding judge. The Arizona
Bar Association rates her performance as
rather poor. Although undeniably intel-
ligent and hard-working, she hasn ' t had
experience with the constitutional and
statutory problems that routinely come
to the Supreme Court, or even with more
mundane kinds of Federal law. Her work
as a state trial and intermediate apel-
late judge has focused on routine local
matters like landlord-tenant, or work-
er's compensation and criminal law.

Although the appointment of Sandra
Day O'Connor is seen as victory by
women's movement leaders and marks a
critical application of affirmative
action, most reports and commentators
agree that it is too soon to predict
the effect of her presence on the
formerly all male bench or the forma-
tion of her judicial philosophy as
Associate Supreme Court Justice.

She comes to a Court that has been
so badly split in recent years that in

many cases no more than three of four
Justices could agree on any single
opinion. The present Court has two
conservatives, two liberals, and five
swing votes. Mrs. O'Connor replaces
Justice Potter Stewart, who was one of
the swing votes often crucial in decid-
ing key issues. Whether the new Justice
will become strongly aligned with the
conservative wing or will fill the posi-
tion of that critical fifth swing vote
is a question being closely debated.

Charles D. Kelso, writing in the
Pacific Law Journal (13:259-72 January
1982) in his article titled "Justice
O'Connor replaces Justice Stewart: What
Effect on Constitutional Cases?" states
(after examination of the pattern of
votes in which Stewart's vote with the
majority was crucial to the outcome)
that "if the assumption is made that
Justice O'Connor will more often than
not align herself with conservative
rather than liberal positions, her
presence on the Court will not change
many of its decisions. Of course, if
Justice Brennan or Justice Marshall
were to retire during President Reagan's
term and were succeeded by conservative
Justices, then a number of old doctrines
might well be reexamined."

Mrs. O'Connor's conservative bias
is of course one of the primary reasons
why she was chosen by President Reagan
and during the Court's first term which
began in October, Mrs. O'Connor has in
48 of 52 written opinions cast her lot
with former law school classmate William
Rehnquist and with Chief Justice Burger
to help forge a clear conservative ma-
jority on a number of crucial issues.

On January 12, 1983 she provided
the fifth vote for a bare majority rul-
ing that ordinary taxpayers could not
sue in federal court to prevent govern-
ment from giving away valuable surplus
property to a religious group. The
decision turned upon the concept of
"standing" or who is a proper party to
bring a suit, a concept that is at the
center of the philosophical debate over
how active the federal courts should be
in attempting to redress wrongs. The
case was Valley Forge Christian College

vs. Americans United for Separation of
Church and State.

Mrs. O'Connor concurred with
Justice Rehnquist, who derided the
notion "that the business of federal
courts" is to go around "correcting
constitutional errors."

Justice Brennan, dissenting
sharply, accused the majority of en-
gaging in "a dissembling enterprise"
that will slam the courthouse door in
the faces of people who believe that
their constitutional rights have been
violated.

In another case involving the
role of the federal courts, O'Connor
voted with five other Justices to up-
hold a 40 year prison sentence for a
Virginia man convicted of possession
of less than nine ounces of marijuana.
In an unsigned opinion the majority
chastised the lower federal court
judge for daring to second-guess a
state court judge and state legisla-
ture. The justices in the majority
said that federal courts could con-
sider apparently unfair sentences
only in extreme cases. The example
they gave was life imprisonment for
overtime parking.

One instance in which Justice
O'Connor separated herself from the con-
servative block was on January 19, 1982.
She provided the fifth vote to strike
down a death sentence that had been im-

6

posed on a 16 year old boy in Oklahoma.
The sentence was invalid, the court
ruled, because the sentencing judge had
refused to take the youth's troubled and
violent upbringing into account. Chief
Justice Burger wrote the dissent stating
that the lower court had been aware of
the boy's bleak past. This dismissal
suggested the same brand of impatience
expressed last year by Mr. Rehnquist
when he urged judges to get on "with the
business of putting people to death and
not be deterred by continuing appeals."

In the case of the 16 year old boy,
Mrs. O'Connor so strongly disagreed with
Burger and Rehnquist that she filed a
separate opinion castigating the dis-
senters. She noted that the Court had
always taken extraordinary care when the
death penalty was involved, because
capital punishment is final. As to
whether the judge considered the boy's
background, O'Connor said, "Let's take
time to find out and be sure." If the
case returns to the Court after the
state judge considers the boy's past,
she may well vote to have him executed.
She had as a member of the Arizona
Senate voted to reinstate capital pun-
ishment and later as a judge did impose
the death penalty.

As an exponent of judicial re-
straint, Mrs. O'Connor is not expected
to be an instrument of social change.
Her prominence, however, as role model
and symbol of women's improving status
is positive indication of social change.

Linda Greenhouse, writing in the
N.Y. Times in October 1981, suggested
that O'Connor's political savvy, rela-
tive youth and continued openness to the
world at large are at least as signifi-
cant as gender. Sex, in Greenhouse's
opinion, may turn out to be the least
important difference.

However, Lyle Dennistor points out
in MS Magazine (October 1981) that the
current Supreme Court's attitude about
women is shaped by an obsession with
female sexuality: the undeniable fact
that only women can get pregnant and
give birth. This obsessive stereotype
of women continues to influence the

Court's decision on cases involving
issues of custody, family law, homosex-
uality, property law and more. Until
the Court can separate out pregnancy
and birth as functions of some but not
all women during some but not all of the
time, those functions will continue to
be used as a synonym for gender and thus
as excuse for restricting all females as
a category for all of their lives.

No one can predict how Mrs.
O'Connor will grow into her new posi-
tion, and the frequently noted lack of
federal judicial experience makes it
difficult to evaluate Mrs. O'Connor's
judicial philosophy. The Senate Con-
firmation hearings did little to provide
information or insight into this criti-
cal question.

She side-stepped questions on par-
ticular issues and said her decisions as
judge on any issue would be based not on
her personal bias or ideological prefer-
ences but on her knowledge of the law
and its application. In an opening
statement to the Senate Confirmation
Committee on the first day of her con-
firmation hearings September 9, 1981,
Mrs. O'Connor assured her questioners
that she was an advocate of judicial
restraint: "Judges are not only not
authorized to engage in executive or
legislative functions, they are ill-
equipped to do so."

Gracious, controlled and thorough-
ly prepared, she prevailed as much by
her manner as by the substance of her
answers. On September 15, 1981 all but
one of the 18 members of the Judiciary
Committee voted in her favor. On
September 22 her appointment received
approval of 91 senators.

Mary McGory wrote of Sandra Day
O'Connor in the Washington Post (Septem-
ber 10, 1981) "She is an achieving woman
without an edge. She is good-looking
without being alienatingly beautiful and
bright without being alarmingly intel-
lectual." Reporting on her appearance
before the Senate Committee, Julia
Malone noted in the Christian Science
Monitor (September 10, 1981) "Dressed
in a tailored violet suit and soft

feminine blouse, Mrs. O'Connor struck
an even balance of professionalism and
femininity.

O'Connor was born the oldest of
three children in El Paso, Texas. Her
family still enjoys the 155,000 acre
Lazy B Ranch in southeast Arizona where
she grew up. Her pioneer grandfather
from Vermont founded the ranch in the
1880 's thirty years before Arizona be-
came a state. The ranch, remote and
without electricity, was a modest girl-
hood home. Young Sandra Day went to
public high school and then to Stanford
University where she majored in econom-
ics and received a B.A. degree magna
cum laude in 1950. In 1952 she received
her law degree from Stanford where she
was third in the class of 102 students
and editor of Stanford Law Review. That
same year she married. Her husband is
a senior partner in a Phoenix law firm.

Justice O'Connor acknowledges per-
sonal experiences of discrimination on
the basis of sex when applying for jobs
after law school. Firms in Los Angeles
and San Francisco to which she applied
had never hired a female attorney be-
fore— one even offered her a job as
legal secretary. She shifted her course
to public service and found a job as
County deputy attorney in San Mateo,
California. The first of three sons
was born in 1957 while the family was
living in Phoenix. In 1959 she opened
her own law firm working part-time.
After five years as a full-time home-
maker, she returned to full employment
in 1965 as assistant attorney general
for Arizona. In 1969 she was appointed
to replace Senator Isabel A. Brugess in
the Arizona Senate, where she easily
won reelection in 1972. Respected for
a meticulous approach to legislative
duties as exemplified by her insistence
upon factual accuracy^in 1972 she was
elected majority leader, becoming the
first woman to hold that office in any
state.

During five years in the senate she
compiled a voting record that confirms
her place in the Republican mainstream.
She supported measures to limit govern-
ment spending, to revise tax laws, to

equalize the finances of more affluent
and less affluent counties, to provide
tax relief for funding of flood control
and to restore the death penalty. She
championed revision of statutes which
were discriminatory in the number of
hours women are permitted to work,
developed model legislation allowing
women to manage property jointly held
with husbands, and she was in favor of
the Equal Rights Amendment.

In the 1981 confirmation hearing,
abortion became a significant issue.
Mrs. O'Connor had in 1970 voted in
judiciary committee in support of a
bill to repeal Arizona's restrictive
abortion statutes. She opposed a 1974
resolution urging congress to pass an
anti-abortion amendment to the consti-
tution.

On other proposals involving abor-
tion she supported restriction of state
funds for abortions for the poor and a
bill giving the right to hospital em-
ployees not to assist in performing
abortions. Toward the end of her sec-
ond senate term, Mrs. O'Connor decided
to switch to the judicial branch of the
government. In a hard-fought election
in 1974 she won the judgeship on Mari-
copa County Superior Court formerly held
by David J. Perry, also a Republican.
Diligence, sternness and fairness char-
acterized her performance on the bench.
Though not considered a lenient sen-
tencer, she showed genuine concern over
conditions in prisons. All of her hear-
ings not held in chambers were open to
the public.

Mrs. O'Connor served as an alter-
nate delegate to the 1972 Republican
National Convention. She served as co-
chairman of the Arizona Committee to
reelect the President. Preferring law
to politics, she resisted urgings to
run for Governor in 1978 and instead
accepted appointment to the Arizona
Court of Appeals by Democratic gover-
nor Babbitt who said, "Her intellec-
tual ability and her judgment are
astonishing."

Service on the court of appeals
gave little opportunity to make known

8

her views on important controversial
social issues. But in January 1981 she
participated in a symposium "State
Courts and Federalism in the 1980s" in
Williamsburg, Virginia in which she did
express aspects of her judicial philoso-
phy. She followed her remarks with an
essay in William and Mary Law Review
(Summer 1981). She argued that "it is
a step in the right direction to defer
to the state courts ... on federal
constitutional questions when a full
and fair adjudication has been given
in the state court." Maintaining that
state and federal judges are equally
competent, she pointed out, "When the
state court judge puts on his or her
federal court robe, he or she does not
become immediately better equipped
intellectually to do the job." Her
recommendations for decreasing the case-
load of federal courts and reducing in-
tervention of federal courts in state
and local matters agreed with the poli-
cies of newly elected President Reagan.
So when the opportunity arose, Reagan
appointed O'Connor in a move to gain
favor with women's rights advocates who
were unhappy with his stand on ERA and
other relevant issues.

Thus at a time when women consti-
tute less than 7% of federal judiciary
Sandra Day O'Connor, whatever her judi-
ciary philosophy, will bring to the
Supreme Court a solidly grounded under-
standing of the real lives of women in
contemporary society. This does not
suggest that O'Connor will abandon her
devotion to legal precedent or suddenly
become a judicial activist on women's
issues. But perhaps, suggests Lynn
Schafran writing for MS, she will bring
to the Courts' deliberations on issues
affecting women the touchstone of
reality that has been so glaringly
absent.

References

"Reading Justice Sandra Day O'Connor"
by C. R. Schenker Jr. Catholic
University Law Review 31 : 36 5-514
Spring 1982.

"Justice O'Connor Replaces Justice

Stewart: What Effect on Consti-
tutional Cases?" by C. D. Kelso
Pacific Law Journal 13:259-72
January 1982.

"Justice O'Connor's First Six Months"
by N. A. Lewis New Republic
186:17 March 107T982

"Editorial" The Nation July 25 -
August 1, 1981.

Current Bibliography, Vol. A3, No. 1
January 1982.

New York Times Biographical Service
July 7, 1981.

"Two Women" by Jeff Stein Progressive
November 1981, p. 14.

MS. 10:71-2, October 1981.

National Review, 33:1182-3, October 16
1981.

o^cd

9

SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR

Biographical Data

Born March 26, 1930 in El Paso, Texas, daughter of Harold A. Day
and Ada Mae Wilkey Day. Married John Jay O'Connor III in
1952. Three sons, Scott, Brian, and Jay.

Education

Stanford University, B.A., 1950, magna cum laude; LL.B., 1952,
Order of the Coif, Board of Editors, Stanford Law Review.

Judicial Offices

Nominated by President Reagan as Associate Justice of the United
States Supreme Court on July 7, 1981; confirmed by the United
States Senate on September 22, 1981; and took oath of office on
September 25, 1981.

Appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals by Governor Bruce Bab-
bitt and served from 1979 to 1981.

Elected judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court, Phoenix, Ari-
zona, and served from 1975 to 1979.

Legislative Offices

Appointed State Senator in 1969 and subsequently reelected to two
two-year terms, serving in the Arizona State Senate from 1969 to
1975; elected Senate Majority Leader in 1972; served as Chairman
of the State, County, and Municipal Affairs Committee in 1972 and
1973; also served on the Legislative Council, on the Probate Code
Commission, and on the Arizona Advisory Council on Intergovern-
mental Relations.

Legal Positions

Deputy County Attorney, San Mateo County, California, 1952 to
1953; Civilian Attorney for Quartermaster Market Center, Frank-
furt, Germany, 1954 to 1957; private practice of law in Maryvale,
Arizona, 1958 to 1960; Assistant Attorney General, Arizona, 1965
to 1969.

Civic Activities

Member, National Board of the Smithsonian Associates, 1981 to
present; President, member, Board of Trustees, The Heard Mu-
seum, 1968 to 1974, 1976 to 1981; member, Salvation Army Advi-
sory Board, 1975 to 1981; member, Vice President, Soroptimist
Club of Phoenix, 1978 to 1981; member, Board of Visitors, Arizona
State University Law School, 1981; member, Liaison Committee
on Medical Education, 1981; member, Advisory Board, and Vice
President, National Conference of Christians and Jews, Maricopa
County, 1977 to 1981; member, Board of Trustees, Stanford Uni-
versity, 1976 to 1981; member, Board of Directors, and Secretary,
Arizona Academy, 1969 to 1975; member, Board of Junior Achieve-
ment, Arizona, 1975 to 1979; member, Board of Directors, Phoenix
Historical Society, 1974 to 1978.

Other Activities

Member, Anglo-American Exchange, 1980; Chairman, Arizona Su-
preme Court Committee to Reorganize Lower Courts, 1974-1975;
Chairman, Maricopa County Bar Association Lawyer Referral
Service, 1960-1962; former member, State Bar of Arizona Commit-
tees on Legal Aid, Public Relations, Lower Court Reorganization,
Continuing Legal Education; Chairman, Maricopa County Juvenile
Detention Home Visiting Board, 1963-64; Chairman, Maricopa
County Superior Court Judges' Training and Education Commit-
tee, 1977-79; member, National Defense Advisory Committee on
Women in the Services, 1974-74; member, Arizona State Personnel
Commission, 1968-69; Vice Chairman, Arizona Select Law En-
forcement Review Commission, 1979-80; member, Maricopa
County Board of Adjustments and Appeals, 1963-64; member, Ari-
zona Criminal Code Commission, 1974-76.

• Memberships in Professional Organizations

American Bar Association, State Bar of Arizona, State Bar of Cali-
fornia, Maricopa County Bar Association, Arizona Judges' Associ-
ation, National Association of Women Judges, Arizona Women
Lawyers' Association.

C£%§£d

10

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
by
Susan B. Gende , Circuit Judge
14th Judicial District of Illinois

The Illinois Domestic Violence Act
(IDVA) was enacted by the Legislature
and became effective March 1, 1982.
(Illinois Revised Statutes, Chapter 40,
Sections 2301-2 - 230 - 13, 1982).

The Legislature provided that this
new legislation become part of the Dis-
solution (divorce) section of the Illi-
nois law. It is important to note that
one need not be married or seeking a
divorce to make use of the new law.

Police and other law enforcement
officers have historically been frus-
trated for various reasons when domestic
violence has been called to their atten-
tion. The new law deals with many of
these frustrations.

The Illinois Coalition Against
Domestic Violence (ICADV) located at 931
South Second Street, Springfield, Illi-
nois (217-789-2830) has printed excerpts
from the law which are useful tools for
agencies or volunteers involved in at-
tempts to deal with and eradicate vio-
lence in the home and its aftermath.
The new act provides help to victims of
home violence both from the Court and
law enforcement personnel.

A victim of abuse may file a peti-
tion requesting the Court to enter an
Order of Protection directed toward the
abuser. Any person may ask the court
to consider an order of protection in
behalf of children or elderly persons
who cannot act for themselves due to
age or illness. Contrary to earlier
law, arrests may now be made without
a warrant where a criminal offense has
occurred or is occurring between family
or household members, whether or not
such violence occurs in the presence
of an officer of the law.

The statistics compiled by the
ICADV from various sources are
indicative of the severity of the pro-
blem nationwide. FBI statistics of 1973
show 25% of all homicides were a result
of domestic violence. A study by M. E.
Wolfgang in Philadelphia, covering the
period between 1948-1952, showed that
40% of the homicides committed by women
were related to domestic violence. That
same study indicated that 40% of the
women who murdered their partners had
been repeatedly assaulted by them.
James Bannon in 1974, and FBI statistics
of the same year, showed that 40% of
police injuries and 20% of police homi-
cides were due to domestic violence. An
Atlanta Police Department study in 1974
revealed that 60% of all calls for po-
lice help at night were related to
domestic violence.

11

The statistics which most clearly
demonstrate the result of the prevalence
and tragic results of domestic violence
in our country are those with regard to
juvenile and adult offenders. A study
of violent inmates in San Quentin indi-
cated a common thread in their lives,
extreme violence which they experienced
as children. Similarly, violent juven-
ile offenders had such violence in their
background.

The estimation by the ICDV that
one-half of all married women are beaten
at least once by their husbands, the
indication that every social, economic,
racial, educational and religious group
of society is affected with such vio-
lence, estimates of child abuse ranging
from one million to four million cases
per year, incest research which indi-
cates 10% to 20% of American children
are victims of sexual abuse, and abuse
of the elderly by relatives, all speak
to the need for the existence and util-
ization of the new legislation in Illi-
nois and other states.

Victims of such abuse — children,
elderly, spouses and persons sharing
a residence with others — clearly need
assistance so that the legislation is
effectively used. Response to Domestic
Violence Centers in Illinois has been
documented. The Center for Battered
Women in Chicago assisted 1,400 victims
in a two-year period before it closed
for lack of funds. The Illinois Coali-
tion has 37 member organizations devel-
oped since 1978. In 1981, 12,000 women
and their children were served by the
ICADV member programs. The services
provided included 62,000 days of shel-
ter, 67,500 hours of support services,
counseling, transportation and inter-
vention services. Title XX monies have
been utilized, and a new funding source
is now available from increases in mar-
riage license and dissolution of mar-
riage filing fees.

The Domestic Violence Act applies
to persons related by blood or marriage,
ex-spouses, individuals sharing a common
household, parents and children.

Any person who hits, chokes, kicks,
threatens, harrasses or interferes with
the personal liberty of a household mem-
ber (except reasonable parental disci-
pline) has broken the law. The court,
upon petition, may issue an order of
protection on the victim's behalf to:
protect from further abuse; order the
offender to pay support, medical costs
and legal expenses; award child custody;
prevent child snatching; prohibit de-
struction of victim's property; require
the offender to undergo counseling and
offer other relief which the court finds
appropriate. Violation of provisions so
ordered is a Class A misdemeanor.

To obtain an order of protection,
ask your attorney or (if indigent) Legal
Aid, to file a petition, request an
order of protection in conjunction with
your divorce proceedings if you are di-
vorcing, ask the State's Attorney's of-
fice to request an order of protection
if a criminal prosecution (such as a
battery) is in progress.

The law also provides that law en-
forcement officers use reasonable means
to prevent further abuse by arranging
for victims to be transported to a medi-
cal facility or safe shelter, accompany
victims to their residence to get
belongings, arrest violators where
appropriate, file a police report with
the victim receiving a copy, advise the
victim of his/her rights. The victim
may go to the State's Attorney's office
to press criminal charges.

All those concerned about domestic
violence, whether victims, friends of
victims, members of victims' households,
agency personnel, teachers, lawyers,
medical personnel, clergy or citizens
aware of such violence, have, it appears
logical to conclude, a duty to help
eradicate this tragic and pervasive tear
in the fabric of our country.

The courts stand ready to exercise
the authority the Legislature has given
them to assist in the eradication of
domestic violence. The courts need your
help to make sure a petition is filed
for them to consider so that orders of
protection may be issued.

12

From California Women , October/

November 1981, published by the

California Commission on the

Status of Women.

questioned the objectivity of white
Anglo-Saxon male judges who have been
presiding over us all, male and female,
of every color and ethnic background.

"The elevation of a woman, Sandra
Day O'Connor, to the U.S. Supreme Court
for the first time has sparked renewed
concern as to whether women judges can
be objective on the bench, particularly
in dealing with such highly emotional
and female-oriented issues as abortion
and rape. This erroneous and presump-
tuous apprehension is premised on sex-
ually stereotypical thinking which his-
torically has permeated so much of our
male-dominated culture, including the
legal and judicial professions.

It is a startling revelation that
over the decades so few among us have

The woman who meets the traditional
qualifications for the Supreme Court to-
day can be expected to perform equally
with her male counterparts and can be
counted upon to be at least as objective
and fair as her 'brethren.' And if in
the intrapersonal , complex and trans-
cendent judicial decision-making pro-
cess, she introduces a long overdue
female perspective, so be it!"

— Joan Dempsey Klein
Presiding Justice
California Court of Appeals
President, National Associ-
ation of Women Judges

-For the first time in its history, over
half of the 191 first-year students
entering the University of California
at Davis School of Law in 1981 were
women. Fifty-two percent of the
entering class were female.

-A study by the American Bar Foundation
shows that by 1980 the percentage of
women lawyers, though still small, was

more than double what it had been ten
years earlier. Women were 7.5 percent
of all attorneys in 1980, compared to
2.8 percent a decade ago.

-Seven years after graduating from
Harvard University Law School, 25% of
the men, but only 1% of the women,
were partners in law firms.

13

FOR THE PROSECUTION

by Laura Schilling, J.D. , Deputy
District Attorney, Santa Clara County

I've been prosecuting felons for
several months now — the assignment has
allowed me a firmer feeling of profes-
sionalism— misdemeanors are so volumi-
nous and endless and relative as com-
pared to the wrongdoing I now try to
address.

Right now, and for the last few
days, I am aware of the emotional ef-
fects, and wonder where they'll take
me . . . 14-year old defendents in
homicide cases, and just generally
the array of transgressions that are
strong statements about the perpetra-
tors, society, the victims, punishment,
politics, etc.

Apparently, I am good as a trial
attorney, and I'm glad to be able to do
trials . . . but the exposure takes its
toll, and I worry about hardening. A
defendant pled guilty to one count of
rape last week, and I was aware of not
having fully believed the victim. I was
surprised. The same skepticism that
makes a good attitude for cross-examina-
tion can creep into all phases of your
life. It's hard to know when to leave
it — hopefully some time before I become
unfit to do anything else.

Today a judge was sure I hadn't
been in his courtroom before, because,
as he put itj"I wouldn't forget a face
like that." I decided to feel compli-
mented, which had very little to do with
being a lawyer. I think we should each
try to be who we really are, as we pur-
sue our professions. At the same time,
I am fully aware that the compliment
could easily have been interpreted as a
sexist assault; and I could have shown
an ugly reaction.

It may be that being a woman is
having someone open the door for you,
especially if your arms are filled with
cases, lawbooks, and a briefcase. I
have always been genuinely grateful for
the help. At the same time, I assume
that a man would do this for a male
colleague as well.

Some months ago, a late-middleaged
attorney, who had not gotten his way,
mumbled, "Your sure are pretty to be
such a hard-ass D.A. ," as he left the
j udge ' s chambers .

It seemed such a strange thing to
say, don't you think? I suppose my be-
ing a D.A. and a woman struck him as
contradictory. It has never occurred
to me in that way.

The challenge is in staying as
natural as possible, trying to feel like
you belong among all these men. The
challenge is in not becoming caricatures
of men, which we will do if we hide our
real thoughts, feelings, and reactions.
(This is something men are much better
at.) This is quite common among women
attorneys I've met.

The world does not need women using
men as models. It needs women being
women. It needs our values. We are all
just beginning to realize how important
those values really are. I think it has
to do with processes, and patience, and
endurance. All of which have nothing to
do with any laws written so far. It has
nothing to do with being neither a woman
nor a lawyer first, but with being both,
without any internal sense of contradic-
tion. Each of us in our own way.

Being a woman and a lawyer has much
to do with who you are, and very little
to do with being a lawyer. Being a
lawyer has to do with knowing the facts
of your case, and the applicable law,
and little to do with gender.

14

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

prepared by
Joanne R. Creager

"The Partnership Push," Savvy, March
1980, and "Outsiders Within," Savvy,
October 1981 are two excellent articles
dealing with women lawyers, and the
problems encountered in trying to get
ahead in a traditional law firm setting.

Sexist Justice. Karen De Crow, Vintage
Books, NY, 1974. Somewhat dated, yet
(ironically) timeless nonfiction account
of the history of women's legal status
in America.

Rights and Wrong ' s — Women ' s Struggle for
Legal Equality, Nicholas et al, Feminist
Press, Old Westbury, NY 1979. Basic,
easily accessible, would make good read-
ing for young feminists.

Women and Law, microfilm (40 reels),
Women's History and Research Center,
2325 Oak Street, Berkeley, CA 94708.
Please refer to review in The Creative
Woman, Vol. 3, No. 1, Summer 1979,
p. 26. This outstanding microfilm
series, a real databank on the subject,
is indexed and covers: law in general,
politics, employment, education, prison,
blacks and law, and third world women.

Women in Law. Cynthia Fuchs Epstein,
Basic Books, Inc., NY 1981. The most
definitive work to date devoted exclu-
sively to the subject of what it means
to be a woman attorney.

Women ' s Rights Law Reporter. Rutgers
Law School. This is a continuing pub-
lication, dealing with actual case law,
as well as concepts of interest to
women in understanding progress in the
area of legal rights. Any large law
library should have it available.

Equal Rights: The Male Stake, Leo
Kanowitz. University of New Mexico
Press, 1981.

"Women's Issues and Male Decision
Makers: An Analysis of The Burger
Court," Kathleen Schwede , Graduate
Student Political Science Department,
Western Michigan University. (Paper
given at conference The Woman
Researcher at Western Michigan
University on November 12, 1982.)

«

(tip <frivj> ftiti) tiift tiift (jM tiift tii& tii&

15

Surely there must be lawyerbane!
Growing slowly as a bristlecone pine-
pungent, medicinal, aromatic as
eucalyptus,
stringent as lii
a necromantic plant
the very sprig of which
makes weak the knees of fatcats
and stills the upraised jawbone of
the ass.

16

A Time For Oneness

PORTRAIT OF THE LAWYER AS ARTIST
by Susan J. Martin

When Joanne Creager, a former stu-
dent now working for the Catholic Con-
ference in Sacramento, invited me to
write an article for this issue of The
Creative Woman, she suggested that I
share some of my reflections on my seven
years of experience as a law teacher.
As I am now on a one-year leave of ab-
sence from the law school discovering
new dimensions in my own life, I find
it interesting to think about the women
I've known for whom law school did not
provide the complete answer or even a
very good clue to their undeveloped
potential.

In addition to professional and
financial advancement and a desire to
serve others, it has been my experience
that a number of women in law school are
there, in whole or in part, because of a
man and their desire to defy, escape or
please him. These reasons are not with-
out parallel among male students. More
than one man is in law school to protect
himself or to seek vengeance in the wake
of an acrimonious divorce. And I have
reason to believe that many single men
in law school hope to become more at-
tractive to the opposite sex when they
have earned their law degrees.

Nevertheless, I'm better acquainted
with the motives and problems of women
in this regard and with the experience
of one woman in particular. Myrna was
not one of my students. She is my
friend, and she is a success story,
perhaps in part because she did go to
law school, although the law degree she
earned in five years of hard work will
probably never hang in a law office.

Myrna is a creative woman — a tal-
ented artist. Her decision to seek
commercial success and personal fulfill-
ment as an artist was made while she
was in law school.

Before law school, Myrna was mar-
ried to a successful attorney and lived,
in her words, "to please my man."
Married at 21, she expected the wedding
kiss to seal her happiness as she had
watched Doris Day and Rock Hudson seal
theirs in so many movies. For the more
than ten years that their marriage
lasted, Myrna lived to please her hus-
band. He came home each night to a per-
fectly groomed wife waiting with his
martini in hand, ready to serve their
dinner by candlelight. So ingrained
was this routine in her life as "man
pleaser" that Myrna continued it in the
days after her husband announced his
intention to move out of the house and
seek a divorce.

/ Live Alone With My Cat

17

Myrna was in law school then. She
went to law school because her husband
had encouraged her to, and she thought
this added accomplishment would make a
good marriage perfect. She wanted to
understand her husband's work so they
would have that to discuss in their
evenings together. In the first year
of law school, when Myrna was there to
please her husband, she was seventh in
a class of 400 or so students — easily
in the top one or two percent. When she
graduated, she had an eighty average,
ranking in the top fifty percent. Aside
from the devastation of the divorce,
Myrna admits that her sole motivation
when she entered law school was to make
her husband proud of her. With the
divorce, she lost the motivation to
succeed in her studies but gained self-
confidence in pursuing them to their
conclusion.

If law school was for her husband,
Myrna' s art work is for herself. "That's
why," she says, "I use only my first
name to sign my works. That's mine. I
don't use my maiden name. I don't use
ray married name."

Myrna' s interest in art, renewed in
law school, was first aroused when she
was in high school. She went to the
High School of Music and Art in New York
City (the school that provided the in-
spiration for the movie "Fame.") Her
father, a well-known concert violinist
and conductor, taught there. It was
taken for granted that Myrna would

study music, but during concerts at the
school she would frequently wander off
to the art section to look in awe at the
sculptures. Years later, when Myrna was
married and living in Los Angeles, she
met a local artist, Roberta Kritzer, at
a sculpture exhibit. Ms. Kritzer of-
fered to give her lessons and an excited
Myrna hurried home to get her husband's
permission. Before long, her works were
on display at Bamsdall Park, Home Sav-
ings in Studio City, and the Toluca Lake
Art Festival. Myrna loved sculpting.
"It was fantastic to be able to work on
a head in clay for six months and to
keep giving it a new nose job each week
if I didn't like the look. My sculp-
tures are the children I didn't have."

During law school, Myrna turned her
attention from sculpture to linoleum
block printing. Each "linocut" is done
by hand in a series of up to 30. These
works have taken Myrna through the ever-
changing emotions she has experienced
since her divorce. "What I couldn't
seem to verbalize and say to him or to
anyone else came out in my art work. "
One of her early works, "A Time for
Oneness" might well have been titled
"Separation." The linocut depicts a
man and a woman who are physically
close but who are looking away from
each other. As Myrna began to recover
from the shock of the divorce and to
enter into new relationships, more
optimistic feelings were reflected in
works such as "Daisy Days or Someone
Special Brought Me Flowers." Likewise,
new frustrations found expression in
"Waiting for His Call" and "Thoughts
of Him Distract Me."

^1/5*

: /Kp-h.

Myrna has no intention of practic-
ing law but she is not ungrateful for
her law school experience. She is more
assertive, more articulate, and she has
the strength that comes from knowing
"if I survived that, I can survive
anything. "

Quiet Interlude

Myrna' s most recent linocut is
called "Looking Back Doesn't Hurt Any
More." She's having difficulty finish-
ing it and wonders if it will help to
retitle it "Looking Back Hurts a Lot

18

Less Now." She admits that the memory
of her marriage and divorce may always
carry pain for her. But she knows that
she has survived that pain and the
rigors of law school. She isn't prac-
ticing law but she has found success and
happiness on her own terms. To my mind,
she more than justifies the inscription
she wrote on the condolence card she
sent to her ex-husband when their di-
vorce was final: "In deepest sympathy
on the loss of your loved one. She was
a warm, beautiful woman."

(Professor Martin is on leave from
Southwestern University in Los Angeles.
Myrna Russ may be reached in Los
Angeles. Her linoouts are currently
on display at Semion's Gallery in
Laguna Beach.)

Waiting For His Call

AFLOAT AGAIN

At night

we are like fish

that swallow each other

morning

we land

take separate paths

in private worlds

darkness

our lost selves

are afloat again

heading for each other

with mouths open

by Sue Saniel Elkind

19

I WAS A LAW SCHOOL WIFE
by Cynthia J. Lee

It's been almost three years now
since my stint as a law school wife. In
spite of my feminism, "law school wife"
seems an apt description. Too often, I
felt married to an educational regime,
and only secondarily to my husband,
Marshall.

Law school became the center of our
lives, triggering major changes in each
of us, and testing our relationship in
unexpected ways. Presented here is a
personal account of the different stages
we encountered over the three years of
Marshall's legal education.

In sharing my experience as a law
school wife, I hope to communicate the
significance of law school for both
partners in a relationship. Law school
is not unique in this way. Certainly,
other life experiences profoundly in-
fluence a relationship, like the birth
of a child, or a move to a new city.
But with its unrelenting intensity, law
school takes its place alongside other
events that can seriously affect the
health and well-being of the life two
people share. »

We thought we were well-prepared
for the law school experience. Our de-
cision had been a careful one, preceded
by long discussions. After six years
of work in state and city government,
Marshall was certain about his interest

in law. I fully supported his desire
to go to law school, and together we
weighed the alternatives: whether to
go full- or part-time, whether to apply
to schools outside of Chicago, whether
we could live on one income. We were
both in our late twenties and had lived
together for four years, including two
years of marriage. Through those years
we had coped successfully with many
changes: new jobs, my own graduate ed-
ucation, even family deaths. We were
sensitive to the time and energy demands
of developing careers, and neither of
us was a stranger to long work hours.
Through it all we had managed to find
time for ourselves, and our relation-
ship felt sure and steady.

The shift to a single income ap-
peared to be the most difficult change
we would encounter with Marshall in a
full-time program. No financial support
was available from our parents, but with
school loans, my full-time income, and
his part-time job, we believed we could
manage. In fact, the notion of becoming
the primary breadwinner appealed to me.
My husband had supported me while I was
in graduate school, and now I had the
opportunity to return his support.
Moreover, I was eager to try this new
role, one I had not been conditioned
to assume. I viewed this step as real
progress in a long journey toward inde-
pendent, self-sufficient womanhood.
Marshall, a product of his own condi-
tioning, agreed that this aspect of law
school would be an important, though
scary, avenue of growth for both of us.

20

We also had role models: people
who had been in law school or who were
in the midst of juggling law school and
home life. It obviously could be done.
Of course, there were a few rumblings
from the spouses and roommates of law
students. I dismissed their dark warn-
ings as bitter exaggerations, signaling
relationships in trouble, quite apart
from law school. In short, Marshall
and I felt mature and ready to face
whatever law school trials awaited us.

And so, in September of 1977, it
began.

The huge law textbooks were the
first signs that we were entering a mas-
sive field of knowledge. The law seemed
an exciting new frontier, and we both
tried to understand how it was different
and similar to our prior learning. I
emphasize "we" for in the beginning
weeks it truly felt as if we were tack-
ling law school together. We shared a
common frame of reference and enjoyed
new intellectual challenges. Before
long, however, it became all too clear
who was doing the work. I watched as
Marshall began to struggle with the
insecurities that surface when one trav-
els into a foreign territory, feeling
ill-prepared by any previous experience.
The point was brought home, literally,
that law school was not an adventure to
be taken lightly or casually by either
of us.

About two months into the first
term a communication hurdle emerged. It
centered around Marshall's attempts to
share complex principles of law and ex-
citing case examples with me. Since the
material was very new to him, he some-
times could not explain as well as he
wanted. At the same time, I found my-
self beginning to feel defensive when-
ever I did not understand quickly. To
counter this, I would translate the un-
familiar legal terms into layman's lan-
guage, with humor and with a reminder
that jurors had no legal training. Gen-
erally, this humor served to ease the
tension and to underscore the seeming
pomposity of this technical language.
It was still important to both of us
that we share the experience as much

as possible. I worked harder to com-
prehend, and as he understood more, he
found it easier to explain. Eventually,
we began to enjoy these discussions.

Overcoming this communication gap
gave us a sense of the conditioning that
is a definite part of a legal education.
Students are encouraged to believe that
the analytic approach to the law in-
volves a superior way of thinking that
is the province of a special few: law
students and professors, practicing
attorneys, and judges. We both felt
that law students, especially those
right out of college, would find it hard
to combat the professional elitism and
arrogance that results from this condi-
tioning process. While it may be of
immense value to students who are trying
to assuage their insecurities in a new
profession, this elitism can alienate
old friends, lovers and spouses. For-
tunately, Marshall had lived a life
before law school. He knew bright,
competent people in many fields, and
he successfully resisted this pull. To
his credit, he sought out other students
who were older, more experienced, and
not afraid to admit their fears.

In spite of this awareness, there
were new tensions with old friends dur-
ing the first year of law school. Our
friends, and Marshall's friends, pro-
vided an important emotional anchor to
him at this vulnerable time. But some-
times friends became prickly, unsure of
what his new identity as a lawyer might
mean for the friendship. Both my hus-
band and his friends were very sensitive
to the possibility that his new profes-
sion might bring rejection. When con-
versations grew tense, I found myself
acting as a mediator and, later, as a
sounding board for Marshall as he tried
to sort out these tensions. Occasionally
I was also speaking for myself, not just
interpreting the reactions of friends.

Almost as soon as these insights
were upon me, the first year was over.
We embarked on a thoroughly enjoyable
summer of being together again, without
school to interfere. It felt wonderful
to have three months away from the pre-
occupations and schedule of law school.

21

I hated to see that summer end.

Too soon, Marshall was registering
for classes and buying books. Law
school was with us once again. There
was no escaping the fact that we had
two more long years of the same rou-
tine ahead of us. The schoolwork was
voluminous, constant, and unyielding.
Again our homelife was defined by his
rigorous study schedule. After a dinner
together, he would head for his study
area and another cosmos, without me.
Our Friday and Saturday nights and
Sunday mornings were free for us, but
the spontaneity I treasured had van-
ished. Gone were impulsive decisions
to see a film, go shopping together,
or have dinner with friends during the
week. Our daily life was rigidly
structured, and time together became
a rare, pre-arranged commodity.

It was not until that second year,
after our lovely summer, that I real-
ized just how lonely I was. It wasn't
that Marshall was gone a lot. Worse,
he was home and unavailable to me.
Slowly, the feelings of anger and re-
sentment grew. I felt betrayed, for
this was not the vision of law school
to which I had agreed. I tried to be
generous and understanding. There was
no doubt that law was an excellent pro-
fession for Marshall. And he certainly
hated the wretched process as much as I
did. I knew he was trying hard to jug-
gle my needs along with the demands of
school and his part-time job. None of
this insight lessened the hurt and dis-
appointment I felt when — once more — I
found myself doing things alone, or
foregoing events I really preferred to
share with Marshall. Increasingly, I
resented a schedule which seemed to
bring us together by appointment.

Added to this emotional cauldron,
we each had unanticipated negative re-
actions to my role as the primary bread-
winner. I liked the feeling of inde-
pendence that came with my new role.
But I realized, to my intense dislike,
that co-existing with this "proper" fem-
inist response was anger at not being
the one supported. Even more frustrat-
ing, the money I worked hard to earn

was never enough. I wanted to feel
good about being the main supporter,
with money to treat us on occasion, and
money to put aside. Instead, there was
never enough to pay all our bills, let
alone to save or to savor. I felt like
a failure at this important new role.

Marshall, on the other hand, was
obsessed that bills were not being paid
on time. He laid awake at night worry-
ing about where the money could come
from. He was going to school full-time
and working when he wasn't in class. He
was chronically tired, doing the best
he could — and it wasn't enough. Other
friends and relatives had their educa-
tions behind them and were living com-
fortably. He was getting a late start
and wondering if it was worth it.

Hardest of all during this time was
our inability to talk about these feel-
ings together. Neither of us wanted to
express our hurt and resentment about
the situation. My feelings, when I
admitted them to myself, sounded petty
and selfish. I knew how hard my hus-
band worked, and how tired and over-
whelmed he felt. I did not want to
add to his pressures by complaining
about feeling neglected. Besides, I
rationalized, there did not seem to be
any realistic way to fix the situation.
When semester breaks came, we were
relieved to have time to relax, and
neither of us wanted to spoil those
rare times with fights we weren't
certain we could resolve. And so we
swept our feelings under the rug, a
rug that was becoming harder for us
to walk over.

The summer between the second and
third year was a strange one. Marshall
worked at the U.S. Attorney's Office for
the Justice Department, and due to the
nature of the Office's investigation, he
was not at liberty to discuss the cases
he researched. As a result, our conver-
sations about his work were short, usu-
ally consisting of one-word answers like
"fascinating" or "interesting" but with
no details. At a time when we very much
needed to share more of our lives with
each other, an important part of his new
life was off-limits to me.

22

At last, we entered the third year.
With the end in sight, we both experi-
enced relief and confidence that the
worst was over. Marshall began to in-
terview for his first job as an attor-
ney. With one foot still in law school,
he faced the decision about the type of
law he wanted to practice and where he
wished to work. He decided upon civil
litigation and, after a round of appli-
cations, interviews, and a couple of
disappointments, he received and ac-
cepted an offer from a fine firm. We
celebrated. There was only one more
semester to go, and then the grueling
bar exam. But each of us knew that law
school would end, and we could get on
with our lives.

I decided to change jobs, leaving
my state government planning position to
work in a university research center. I
felt liberated from state bureaucracy
and from the domination of law school.
The tension began to ease between us and
our humor returned. Graduation came,
and I threw a family dinner and a party
for friends in celebration. We lived
through the bar exam and went immedi-
ately on a fine vacation, visiting old
friends in Massachusetts and then on to
Montreal. In many ways, this trip was
a symbol of resuming our lives where we
left off since this was essentially the
same vacation we had taken one year
prior to the start of law school. It
was a lovely, well-earned vacation,
and we enjoyed it tremendously.

When we returned, Marshall started
his full-time work at the firm, and
waited to hear whether or not he had
passed the bar exam. Passing was the
single remaining rite of passage to be-
ing a full-fledged practicing attorney.
We waited two months to learn the re-
sults. This was a painful period of
time, since law school was not really
finished until the exam was passed,
regardless of graduation.

On October A, 1980, our fifth wed-
ding anniversary, the good news arrived:
Marshall had passed the bar exam. It
was truly over, and we celehrated for
two weeks.

The two years following law school,
we settled down to the hard work of
straightening out our relationship.
There were long nights and weekend days
of exploring, and remembering, and
bringing out those past hurts and
angers. It was not an easy time. In
large part, our ruptured relationship
was the result of the manner in which
we coped, and did not cope, with law
school. Our reactions to the law
school experience cannot be separated
from the basic strengths and weaknesses
of our relationship, or from our coping
skills as individuals. But law school
was a significant life step that radi-
cally impinged upon our relationship.

My husband's reactions probably
were not so different from those of
many other law students. He often was
overwhelmed and insecure, and almost
always preoccupied and exhausted. I
reacted in ways that are typical, no
doubt, of those who live with law stu-
dents. I was confused by the intensity
of the neglect, loneliness, resentment,
and anger I felt toward the situation
and my husband. The more obsessed he
became about his new profession, the
more distant he seemed from me, and the
more neglected I felt. We found it hard
to confront our hurt and anger at the
times these feelings occurred. As a
couple, we were not as good at these
confrontations as we needed to be. The
rigors of the study schedule left pre-
cious little time for spontaneously
addressing painful issues. Our sensi-
tivity to each other's situation also
made it difficult to share our feelings
at the time.

Without question, law school was a
time of growth for both Marshall and me,
much of it painful, and little of it in
those areas where change was anticipated
and welcomed. Even today, three years
after his entry into law school, memo-
ries and feelings about the experience
are unsettling for me. In retrospect,
it was the right professional choice
for my husband, and he is well suited
to law. It has been a source of real
joy to see him grow more and more com-
fortable with his attorney role. We
are now closer, more sensitive to each

23

other's needs, and much better about
dealing with emotional issues as they
occur.

Passing any of life's milestones
can be damaging to a relationship. The
process of becoming an attorney will
affect both the law student and his/her
partner. With sensitivity to each
other's needs and fears, and a resolve
to confront emotional tensions as they
occur, the adjustment to law school or,
for that matter, any decision which de-
mands such adjustments, will be easier
for both people. These are good pre-
scriptions for maintaining the health of
any relationship, at any time. But they
become especially important when signi-
ficant life events test the strength of
a couple's commitment to one another.

24

PORTRAIT OF A PROFESSIONAL
by Joanne R. Creager

The afternoon sun adds to the gold-
en aura of success that fills her office
between the Sacramento River and the
Capitol dome. Here is a bright and very
energetic woman, an attorney who is ob-
viously enjoying her job and thriving on
its challenges.

It wasn't always this way. Mary-
Lou Smith was teacher at one time, then
held various administrative positions
with state government. She became a
lawyer later in life, the Hard Way . . .
night law school, while working full-
time and raising her family. By the
time she was admitted to the Bar in
1969, she had worked out a lot of things
in her life, and revitalized her out-
look. Her life radiates a positive
approach, which she has developed and
earned over the years.

She is such an upbeat person, she
acts as the mainstay of a women attor-
neys and law students support network.
(Her enlightened husband frequently
cooks gourmet meals for the group.) She
is also a founding member and leader of
California Women Lawyers.

The insightfulness that makes her
so meaningful to others is evidenced in
talking to her . . . reflecting back
over law school and career, she points
out that "things haven't really changed
that much" for women going into the
legal profession. A lot of strength is
needed, just to get through law school,
where the atmosphere is one of competi-
tion, rather than support and coopera-
tion. She recalls that few men had the
capacity to maintain personal relation-
ships with women law students throughout
the ordeal. Breakups were prevalent.
Rather than overt, heavy-handed sexism,
she experienced a pervasive oversimpli-
fication of women's issues . . . which
causes one to reflect what fitting one-
self to the Procrustean bed of "The
System" of law-as-practiced in the U.S.
does to a woman's deep, inner identity.

This carries over from law school into
a general attitude among men, who basi-
cally "can't handle" professional women,
an attitude Mary-Lou appears to rise
above by pure energy.

In her current position as director
of regulatory services for Associated
General Contractors, she deals with the
highly complex subject matter of how to
facilitate a favorable business climate
within her industry by coping with a
maze of government regulations and agen-
cies. She works with such issues as
environment and energy, construction
industry safety, litigation, force ac-
counts, and the progress of women in
construction.

Instrumental in the creation of
California's innovative and money-saving
Construction Contract Arbitration pro-
gram, she worked out much of the legal
detail of the out-of-court dispute reso-
lution that now saves companies thous-
ands of dollars and years of time, when
compared with going to court. In addi-
tion to her legal training, she brought
a skill to this task: the fine art of
working with government. Here is where
she believes women have a natural advan-
tage, where a cooperative and reasonable
approach pays off over the years in the
good karma of helpful contacts, knowing
who to talk to for the right information
necessary to solve problems without
escalation.

She characterizes this skill, in
general, as "the art of working within
what is still an almost all-male sys-
tem." Her informal study of the com-
plexities of working relationships has
shown her that men, who are easily in-
timidated by more verbally apt women,
have their own subtle ways of getting
even, by such things as effectively bar-
ring women from the inner circle of
their team, in various unspoken ways.
(Does this sound like True Life Adven-
tures from Games Mother Never Taught
You?)

Mary-Lou radiates a refreshingly
wide range of interests, something
not typical of the legal profession

25

generally . . . from the tasteful
prints, plants, yellow-gold walls, and
peacock feathers of her office, to her
personal commitment to social justice
issues and her understanding of the
"male world" of construction, to her
compassionate and supportive attitude
towards struggling women professionals,
her aliveness exemplifies the energy
and capability of working women.

Asked for sensible advice for wom-
en aspiring to become attorneys, she
suggests getting practical experience,
first-hand, on what law practice is
really like. Unlike the glorified
images you see on TV, she says, there

are days when "you never leave your
desk." She also advises against going
into law with the goal of "helping
people," something which idealists are
inclined to do. There are other pro-
fessions which help people much more.

Most of all, she reflects, in the
sometimes abrasive and hostile world of
law it is essential to believe in your-
self and to deliberately become the very
best you can be, in every way. You
can't have too much savvy, an ambient
term she uses to describe the combina-
tion of sensitivity and analytical ap-
proach and determination that helped her
become what she is today.

26

'THIS IS NO WAY TO LIVE . . . .'

WOMEN LAW STUDENTS LOOK AT THE

LAW SCHOOL EXPERIENCE

by Julie A. Norman

We are still in the middle of the
law school experience; I am that is, as
are women whose views appear here. We
are not sure where law will lead us, but
we do know that the experience has af-
fected, and is affecting, our lives. By
the time I first thought about writing
this article, I had come to realize that
I was changing but I wasn't sure whether
these changes were related primarily to
law school, or to my "mid-life crisis,"
or to changing careers. These talks
with women who are my friends and col-
leagues at law school reinforced for me
the significance of the experience of
law school in my life as an agent of
change. All of the women to whom I
talked have found getting through law
school to be a profound experience.

Barb

Barb, at 24, is the youngest of the
women. She is the single parent of a
six-year-old daughter. Never married,
Barb has had to work hard to make it by
herself. She is an evening student with
a year to complete. Before entering law
school, she held a number of jobs and
still worked as a waitress during her
first year of law school. For the past
one and a half years she has been a
part-time law clerk in a Loop firm.
She wants to be a civil trial lawyer.

Barb began law school with an in-
terest in criminal law but through expo-
sure to the realities of criminal law
the romantic idea of defending "street
people" lost its attraction.

During her second year, Barb broke
off with her lover of three years be-
cause she found him lacking in motiva-
tion and ambition. Prior to law school,
she had enjoyed his easy-going style but
now has no interest in unmotivated peo-
ple. Barb has also found that she has

no time or inclination for "mum social-
izing" activities she once enjoyed.

Earning money has Increasingly be-
come important. She cares deeply about
social issues, but knows that she cannot
earn enough to support herself and her
daughter by doing only poverty or family
law: circumstances have forced her to
redirect her thinking.

Now in her last year of law school,
Barb respects the law less, because it
is so anti-peoplej and believes that
lawyers have very few morals, viewing
the legal profession as a game to be
won. Although Barb intends to use the
law to serve people, she feels that the
structure of the law has been used to
oppress poor people and benefit wealthy
corporations. She is critical of prison
terms and the whole criminal justice
system, and believes that alternatives
such as parole and work release should
be actively pursued.

As a woman lawyer, Barb believes
she will have to prove herself and work
twice as hard as men. She did not real-
ize the degree of discrimination against
women until entering law school and
working in the law firm as a clerk.
This firm has stated that they will hire
no women attorneys because one woman
that they hired chose to terminate em-
ployment rather than return at the end
of her maternity leave. This proves,
they say, that hiring women is a bad
risk. Barb has also become aware of a
high degree of sexual harassment within
this same firm.

Initially the hostile and aggres-
sive nature of law school caused Barb to
lose self-confidence, but standing up to
the rigid structure and sticking with it
have resulted in a renewed sense of con-
fidence. As a result of law school, she
feels more sure of herself in personal
relationships and is unwilling to settle
for less than she wants. The confidence
and assertiveness developed in school
has transferred to her private life.
For Barb, law school represents putting
effort into herself, a very positive
step for her.

27

Jan

Jan is 38 years old, married, and
has a daughter age 10. Before entering
law school, Jan was a Chicago school
teacher who later went into school ad-
ministration to advance her concerns
about education. She is an evening stu-
dent in her last year of school and is
employed full-time as director of incen-
tive programs for the Chicago Public
Schools. She has been promoted twice in
the last year. Jan hopes to become an
attorney for the Board of Education, or
in a private firm. Always conservative
in her opinions and concerned about
earning money, Jan doesn't think, her
political outlook has changed any be-
cause of law school. As an example she
favored capital punishment when she
entered and still does.

She feels her marriage has suf-
fered. Her husband does not understand
what she is going through, and Jan be-
lieves that only those who are in law
school or have attended can understand
the experience.

Jan thinks lack of time has changed
all of her relationships now that she
has become more selective in her use
of time. She has not cultivated new
friendships and has ". . .no social
life." Once she was more tolerant and
understanding of people, but is now
shorter with her co-workers and expects
more of them. She has little tolerance
for people who aren't highly motivated
and finds herself pushing people, just
as she is pushing herself.

school. The practice of law will re-
inforce her new personality.

Leslie

Leslie is 30 years old and a di-
vorced mother of one daughter, age
eight. Divorced for seven years, Les-
lie is employed full-time as an execu-
tive secretary and attends evening
classes. With one and a half years of
school to complete, she has already
been promoted and reassigned to the
legal department of her firm since
starting school. She has also devel-
oped an interest in computer systems
independent of her studies. She be-
lieves that she receives more respect
at work because she is a law student
and finds the men most supportive,
noting that her female co-workers are
either jealous or maternal towards her.
However, some of the women like her and
feel that they are equals.

She is unsure whether law school or
therapy enabled her to become more inde-
pendent in the last years, a "must" for
an attorney. Previously, Leslie looked
to men for the "answers."

Developing friendships also seems
easier but not at law school where the
atmosphere is too competitive.

Leslie thinks her values are un-
changed by law school and feels less
impotent about changing society. She
hopes to do corporate law, but wants to
devote some time to doing pro bono work,
especially for women and blacks.

Law school's greatest impact on Jan
is that decision making takes longer
now. She is more deliberate and exact-
ing in her thought processes.

She believes law school has taught
her to think in a more rigorous fashion.

Hilary

Jan has belonged to no outside stu-
dent organizations at law school. She
went to one black student association
meeting and could not discern why the
organization exists. She never attended
any of the Women's Law Caucus meetings.

Jan feels that' her new attitude
will not change when she finishes law

Hilary is 25. She is single, and
lives with a roommate in a far north
suburb. She began law school four years
ago as a full-time student, but was so
drained and disillusioned that she
dropped out for a year. She began at-
tending again as a part-time student,
and presently has about one and half
years to complete her studies. She

28

works as an assistant manager at a high
school bookstore. When she entered law
school she had no career goal, and is
still unclear about whether she wants to
do criminal law or property law. She
might be interested in some form of cor-
porate law, since she has completed half
of the coursework on a graduate degree
in business administration.

Hilary believes that her way of
thinking about life has changed. She
does not find the world so simple, and
she now questions her values. Her per-
sonal relationships have not changed
only because she warned her friends that
her time is restricted. In addition to
old friends she has formed new friend-
ships at law school. She notes that
night students seem to have their "own
lives," while day students have more
time for socializing since most do not
have jobs or families.

Like Leslie, Hilary works at form-
ing friendships, and values them more,
because both are single and the friend-
ships are some sort of "replacement"^ in
Leslie's words, for a family.

In her first year of law school,
Hilary was involved in the Women's Law
Caucus, and felt it was very supportive
and helpful. A Big Sister program also
helped first year students adjust, and
the Caucus gave them somewhere to come
and commiserate about their problems.
The Caucus also enabled Hilary to meet
other women and to compare notes about
professors (their personalities, exams,
and sexism). She finds that the Caucus
is disorganized now and doesn't seem to
do much, which she believes is a shame
because of the need it can fill.

Ruth

Ruth, at 43, is the oldest of the
women. She was divorced in 1964 and has
two children of college age. Her young-
est child left home last fall at the be-
ginning of Ruth's second year in law
school. Ruth is an evening student who
works nearly full-time as a law clerk in
a general practice Loop law firm. Be-
fore law school, Ruth worked for a

family welfare agency. She has been
active in the Women's Movement since
1967 but is disillusioned with the
Women's Caucus on campus because she
feels it is ineffective. As an example,
she related that when she found a sexist
bumper sticker (about women lawyers) in
the school bookstore and took it to the
Caucus, the dean, as well as the manager
of the bookstore, nothing was done. The
Caucus seemed unwilling to deal with it.
In fact, most regarded it as a joke.

Ruth is more particular about how
she spends her time now. She feels this
pressure has made her more honest,
assertive and able to say "no" if she
doesn't want to do something. She feels
that she was more passive before law
school.

Her work takes Ruth to the Daley
Center, where she describes feeling like
she is in a "men's locker room." There
are still very few women practicing law
compared to the numbers of men. She
sometimes feels out of place, and that
the men are more aggressive in getting
in line at the various courtrooms and
in doing their work. She still has to
think about being assertive in these
situations.

Ruth's feelings about the law are
mixed. Although her studies have been
a growth experience, she is fearful of
the changes. She is considering work
in family law, but is very open to many
different areas of the law.

Julie

I am 38 years old, married, with
one son, age nine. I am an evening stu-
dent and will complete my studies in one
year. Before entering law school, I was
a social worker for 13 years and active
in the civil rights and trade union
movements. I continued to work full-
time for the first year, attending law
school at night. When I resigned from
my job as a social worker, I maintained
that I could always return to my old
profession if the law didn't work out,
only subconsciously admitting the career
change.

29

After spending 13 years listening
to people, trying to figure out what was
motivating them and offering help, the
study of law was a vast "come down."
Much of law is boring, confusing and
seems to go nowhere. There are no real
"victories" as in social work when a
client changes. At least, there are no
victories for me, because I have never
entered fully into the world of compe-
tition there. The role-playing in Moot
Court, or Litigation, is clearly not
real. The struggle to "get an A" just
turns me off cold so that I no longer
tell people my grades.

It has been scary at the same time.
Like my friends, I find myself thinking
about issues differently and if any-
thing, I am more radical, but rarely
leap in emotionally as before. I find
myself thinking about the other side,
and I guess, figuring out an argument
against it.

The isolation of law school after a
career filled with people has been emo-
tionally wrenching. I miss the close
friendships, the people contact with co-
workers and clients, and particularly
the active life of a social worker "on
the streets." The law library just
doesn't measure up!

study. Hilary, who has completed half
of her MBA, pointed out that there is
simply no comparison. Jan has done
graduate work in education and cautions
the same. I can certainly say that no
graduate social work course I ever took
resembles the mind-bending that goes on
in law school. You are forced to con-
ceptualize in a whole new way and the
structure is very rigid, and aggressive.
To succeed women must adapt to the male
mode of thinking and working. Women in
law school must want success, value
achievement above relationships, and
seek to make a mark on the world or his-
tory as they define it. Women adapting
these previously male traits are not
apologizing for them. Is the choice of
this male mode a temporary prerequisite
for women in law, or is this a transi-
tional stage leading to an embodiment
of the female mode into law school
structure and into law itself? Until
then, the frustration of competing in
this male arena is best summed up by
Ruth, who upon receiving her first "D"
was completely shattered. While I tried
to comfort her, she commented (about the
law school struggle) "Julie, this is
just no way to live!" It's not, but
it doesn't last forever. We just need
to outlast it!

When I entered law school, I
thought about becoming a prosecutor,
especially in the area of juvenile law
but also I thought about work in crim-
inal law. I discovered, however, a
"natural" feel for Tort law and a real
excitement about product liability,
medical malpractice, and all sorts of
injuries people suffer that demand a
remedy. But, like Hilary and Ruth, I
feel essentially open and interested
in several different areas.

Leslie told me to encourage anyone
reading this who is thinking of going to
law school, to do so. Law school has
been for her an important experience in
her struggle to become assertive and ma-
ture in a male-dominated world.

However, I must warn that law
school is not the same as graduate

30

THE WOMEN IN WARD C

We never knew what she was like before.

I never really saw,

remember only how she tried to ram

a filched scissors into me

when a nurse wasn't around;

how she pushed the senile lady around

like a walker.

That was when they put the strait jacket
on her and she ran up and down the halls
screaming.

...I will fear no evil, no evil, no evil...

A mad Venus de Milo with hair like blown
snow down her back, bare feet slapping, cold
floors, then Houdini-like, she worked her
way out of the carelessly strapped canvas,
stood naked in her madness
waving metrazol-tracked arms ,
shit on the lysoled floor
while we all watched enrapt
and cheered her on.

Even when she stood poised
on the window ledge,
a bird with wings flapping,
we cheered.

Then with heads hanging

like naughty children,

we shuffled back to our beds .

There was nothing left
to see.

by Sue Saniel Elkind

31

INTERVIEW WITH AN ATTORNEY
by Lynn Thomas Strauss

Marcia Gevers is a successful at-
torney with her own law practice. She
began two and a half years ago with an
office in her home and today has an of-
fice in the community with two attor-
neys, a clerk, one full-time secretary
and one part-time secretary as needed.
Hers is a general practice of real
estate transactions, divorces, estate
planning, criminal cases, corporate
affairs for small businesses and taxes.

Before becoming a lawyer Ms. Gevers
taught for five years and spent six
years as administrative assistant to a
state representative. As in her former
careers, Ms. Gevers experiences personal
satisfaction in her work as a lawyer
because she is able to help people do
things they could not do for themselves.

One skill that serves her well in
legal work is an ability to know where
to go for the answers. When she began
her own firm directly upon passing the
Illinois Bar examination, she called
upon friends who were attorneys to
answer practical questions. She also
believes strongly in "doing" as a way
of learning. "Law school does not
teach you the practical details of
where and how to file legal petitions.
If I went to file without all the re-
quired forms, the clerk would tell me
what was needed and I would go back
and complete the needed forms. Next
time I knew what to do," says Ms.
Gevers.

Her strong desire to achieve legit-
imacy in the world of work is one factor
which led Ms. Gevers into a career in
law. She feels it is important to be
accepted first as an attorney — not as a
woman first and only secondarily as an
attorney. Gevers says she has experi-
enced little discrimination as a woman.
"The title itself works wonders," she
says. A law degree is considered by
many to be a stepping stone to other
achievements, but Ms. Gevers plans to

practice law for a long time and to see
her firm grow and prosper. With this
goal she works from 40 to 80 hours a
week or "until the work is done."

Establishing her own busines
rather than working for a downtown law
firm was initially a practical decision.
Marcia and her husband have two young
children, and she felt it necessary to
work as close to home as possible. "I
needed to know that I could decide when
I would work and when I could run home
to be mommy. I needed flexibility and
control over my time. My office is five
blocks from home so I'm available when
I'm needed — or my secretary is. I told
secretarial applicants that making cof-
fee wasn't mandatory, but driving car
pools to after-school lessons was."

"There are times," acknowledges Ms.
Gevers, "when there is not enough sepa-
ration between work and home." As in
any kind of self -employment , "I may
still get emergency phone calls in the
middle of the night." Gevers' husband
has always shared significantly in
housework and child care. Daughter
Sarah was just over a year old when Ms.
Gevers began law school while working
part-time. Before graduation Gevers
gave birth to her son and took a semes-
ter off shortly after. She admits
that life at that time took a lot of
juggling.

As difficult as it was at times to
combine motherhood and law school, Ms.
Gevers feels that the experience of com-
bining intellectual pursuits and the day
to day care of babies provided a good
balance and helped to keep her feet on
the ground and maintain a reasonable
perspective in the face of the rigors
and often unrealistic expectations of
law school. Ms. Gevers observed younger
women just out of college or whose whole
lives were dedicated to law school and
earning A's who seemed to put a great
deal of unnecessary pressure on them-
selves. Many women seemed to feel that
they had to be better than men, that
they had to be constantly proving them-
selves. Ms. Gevers and women who share
her life circumstances were able through

32

necessity to accept B's and C's in
courses, to pass up the burden and the
glory of making the Law Review. These
sacrifices caused some sadness, accord-
ing to Gevers, but their lives were more
balanced and law school was for them a
step on their career path, not a world
of its own.

Despite the many challenges she
faced while in law school, Ms. Gevers
chose not to participate in the support
group for women students that was avail-
able because she felt it was a mistake
to separate women as a group and provide
special considerations. These support
groups were available only to women and
minority students and focused on emo-
tional rather than substantive issues.
As one of a minority of women attorneys
in the south suburbs, Ms. Gevers has
met several times with her female col-
leagues, but feels there is no reason to
form a separate professional organiza-
tion exclusively for women. Ms. Gevers
is an active member of the South Subur-
ban Bar Association; and in spite of a
sometimes cool reception from male mem-
bers, she tries to encourage other fe-
male attorneys to participate. Rather
than put energy into forming a separate
professional group for women, Gevers is
working toward full participation of all
attorneys in the existing local profes-
sional organization.

hearing is assured by the system.

Overall Ms. Gevers is satisfied
with her career choice but she does ex-
perience frustration with some of the
legal limitations that can prevent an
attorney from helping a client as fully
as she might wish. Another frustration
is with the need to be concerned with
personalities. Personalities of judges
and competing attorneys must be taken
into account along with the legal issues
involved.

Ms. Gevers strongly supports other
women pursuing an interest in the law.
"Ambition and desire will carry you
through the hard work and the long
hours to a place within a very satis-
fying profession."

The hardest thing about law school
according to Gevers was the need to
learn a whole new language and a whole
new way of thinking. She feels that the
best preparation for law school would be
an undergraduate major in philosophy or
English. "A lawyer must also have a
love of learning," says Gevers, "because
a lawyer is learning all the time, even
after law school."

One aspect of the legal system that
Ms. Gevers grew to respect was the order
and proscribed rules governing the legal
process. It is totally unnecessary, ac-
cording to Gevers, for female attorneys
or anyone to be overly aggressive in the
ways in which they present their cases.
The law provides a turn for each attor-
ney and each witness to be heard: a

33

SECTION 3

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dear Editor,

I see things on the news that get me concerned. I see
kids that are disabled, and their parents don't want
them to live. Even doctors sometimes say that it
would be better if they were dead. They starve the
baby to death or withhold treatment. In one case, the
doctor wanted to withhold treatment, and the parents
took the baby to another hospital. Now,
anencephalics, that's different -- if the baby would be
in pain or just a vegetable, then it couldn't have a real
life. But spina bifida, or Down's syndrome, I think
those people have a right to their life. I'm also
concerned about the cuts in funding for services for
disabled people. Sometimes I think that I can't
change anything and that the world's going to pieces.

Kim Keegan

Dear Editor,

The review of Michelle Morris' If I Should Die Before I
Wake by Terri Schwartz in your Fall 1982 issue was
wonderful. From your profound review, I feel that I
have the essence of the book, and a clear focus on
the human pain and self destruction resulting from
incest. And I admire the way you allow your own
feelings, and thoughts, to come through clearly, and
as your own.

This is the most profound, and feelingful, and useful
book review I have read in ages, perhaps ever.

my heartiest congratulations,

Dave Crispin

34

THE DONOR
by Carol Amen

Whenever I see grape leaf ivy, I
think of Mom and the strange way we
lost her.

She was driving home from the
blood bank when the truck rammed her
little car. To me it seemed cruelly
ironic she'd just donated blood. Mom's
type was O-negative, and she was a real
crusader on the subject. Just a few
weeks before the accident, she'd taken
me to the Center.

"Such a nice healthy girl," the
technician said, checking my hemoglobin
prior to my first donation.

Mom beamed. "I've wanted to get
Laurie in here ever since her sixteenth
birthday, but she's so busy. She's al-
most seventeen now."

The doctor described the injury as
a depressed skull fracture. He and the
neurosurgeon told us Mom's brain was
traumatized beyond healing, beyond re-
pair. We just sat there, not believ-
ing them, hoping and praying they were
wrong.

Probably a lot of people were of-
fended at what we eventually did. I
guess if you hadn't known Mom, it would
be hard to understand.

For one thing, we were in shock.
Randy had flown in from his job back
east. He and Dad and I alternated be-
tween pacing and sitting and trying to
make sense out of it. Until then, ac-

cidents had always been something that
happened to other people.

It wasn't even logical. There Mora
lay, her face as serene as ever, not
another part of her injured. Just her
skull.

"Look, Laurie, Dad," Randy said,
"Next to us, what's always been the big
thing in Mom's life?"

Neither Dad nor I answered. We
knew what he was getting at. One of the
doctors had given us a leaflet about the
Perpetual Donor Program. By this time
they'd done dozens of tests. Mom's
heart was in fine shape, they said.
Her body could survive a long time.

"It might ease some of the hurt,"
the first doctor said, his hand on Dad's
shoulder, "to know that Claudia's death
had meaning."

When Dad looked puzzled at the word
"death," the doctor reminded him that
since passage of the Death Definition
Bill, Mom already met the legal require-
ments for death. Her encephalogram reg-
istered no appreciable brain activity.
Once the Euthanasia Board met, there 'd
be another hearing, more papers to sign,
and, finally, what was left of Mom's
life would be terminated painlessly.

Or, Dad could authorize Mom going
into the Donor Program. That was
Randy's wish. As a social worker, he

35

said he saw lots of cases where people
needed transfusions. What better me-
morial to Mora's life than for her blood
to go on helping others?

He was really insistent, and Dad
seemed impressed with his reasoning.

"What do you think, Laurie? what
would your mother want?"

I looked at her, so still, so beau-
tiful. The white bandages seemed almost
like a crown. "Don't make me decide,
Daddy. Please."

Randy spoke again. "For years I've
heard people say 'vegetable' when they
mean the brain's gone. But Mom's not a
vegetable. She's more like a flower."

We argued and. discussed and remi-
nisced. Mom's passions included us, a
few friends, the house and yard (she
loved to grow fuschias, ferns and cycla-
men), and giving blood. Dad used to
laugh and blame some vampire movie she
must have seen as a kid. I'd grown up
taking it for granted Mom was super-
enthusiastic on the subject. She got
her eleven gallon pin when I was nine.

She told me that giving blood made
her feel special, needed. One of her
satisfactions concerned a farmer in the
Santa Clara Valley near where we live.
He'd been spraying his crops with in-
secticides, and somehow his platelets,
a crucial element in his blood, had been
destroyed. Mom and a bunch of other 0-
negative donors kept him alive long
enough to see his son graduate from
high school. His family remembered
Mom with a bouquet of yellow roses
every Christmas.

"As we waited and agonized those
long days in the hospital, we talked a
lot about Mora. Once, when she went to
the Center after a special call, the
nurse told her her blood pressure was
too low; and they would have to refuse
her. It was the first and only time Mom
had ever been turned down, and it made
her so mad she sat there a few minutes
and raised her pressure. She said it
wasn't hard to do, and that the nurse
had taken it twice when it was too low,
and then twice afterward, to make sure
it wasn't a mistake. It would have been
a shame not to be able to give that day,
she thought. There was a hemophiliac
who really needed her blood.

In the end I guess all of us —
Randy, Dad and I — thought the Perpetual
Donor Program would be a way of keeping
part of Mom alive, even though the rest
of her was gone. I wouldn't want Dad to
carry the entire responsibility for the
way it turned out.

We had a Memorial Service in the
hospital chapel; and in a few weeks,
when the paper work was completed, Dad
was declared a widower.

Randy flew back to his job, Dad
went off every morning to work and came
home again at night looking like a zom-
bie, and in between high school and my
job at the discount store, I tried to
keep house.

Every time I struggled with a menu
that had been Mom's specialty, every
time I looked into the yard where her
flowers seemed to cry out with neglect,
every time I rushed off to school with-
out her encouraging me to have a good
day, I missed her.

Once in a while the Center would
call and ask Mom to come down. Maybe
they were doing an exchange transfusion
on a baby, or a lengthy surgery; and
they needed her blood type.

"Some people have charities they
work for, Laurie," she used to say.
"Some people give lots of money or time
for a cause they believe in. I give my
blood. It's as simple as that."

Not that Mom and I had one those
icky, story-book relationships you hear
about in mothers and daughters some-
times. We each had too strong a sense
of privacy for that. But I knew I could
count on her. I hope she'd known that
about me too.

The first time I went to see her
after she was legally dead, I didn't
know what to expect. They had moved

36

her into the donor wing. There were
four "persons" in her ward. Two were
waiting crossmatch for total organ re-
moval. Their parts would go to a number
of suitable recipients. The other room-
mate was another perpetual blood donor.

A young intern talked to me before
I went into her room. "We're not sure
this visiting is a good idea," he said.

"Not good for you, or not good for
me?" I asked, taking an instant dislike
to him.

"The Donor Program is just in its
infancy. We don't know that much about
the dynamics." He pulled a thick sheaf
of papers from a file. "Your family can
help with our research though. It's a
little like being pioneers."

He gave me an eight-page written
test, full of questions about death,
life, my feelings. Finally I was able
to go into her room. It wasn't nearly
as scary as I thought it would be. Mom
had always been a fairly quiet person,
so it didn't seem that odd for her not
to be talking. The intern instructed me
to think of her as a body only, a body
that was being kept alive for science.

One of the older nurses asked about
my religious beliefs. She said she was
praying that Mom's spirit would be at
peace.

"They give her tube feedings," I
told Dad afterwards. "And move her so
she doesn't get bed sores. The nurses
are good to her. If you went, you'd
see that."

But once a month was as often as
Dad could cope with it.

I went every week on ray afternoon
off from work. The doctor disapproved,
and showed me the flat lines from Mom's
encephalogram, meaning her brain was
non-functional.

Even so, I refused to think of her
as just a body with a heart pumping
blood. I sat beside her and reminisced
aloud about stuff — family stories, what

I was doing in school. I pretended she
could hear everything I said, so I tried
to be cheerful. The problem is, I told
myself, she just can't move or talk.

Because she had loved plants and
flowers, I decided to bring her fuschias
or ferns, since those were her favor-
ites, but I was afraid the atmosphere
wouldn't be right for them in her room.
After a lot of thought I settled on
Cissus rhombif olia, grapeleaf ivy, be-
cause it will stand almost any kind of
neglect. I dug up a plant from the
patio and when I got it to the donor
wing, a nurse wheeled in an IV stand
for it to hang from. The waxy leaves
softened the starkness of Mom's room.

The whole thing might sound morbid,
but it wasn't — really. I liked being
with Mom. "We miss you," I'd say. Or,
I'd tell her about my job. I'd been
promoted from stock clerk to cashier and
felt I was making a little progress.

The nurses clucking over me some-
what compensated for the obnoxious
intern. "You're not adjusting to your
mother's death," he said. "You should
be further along in your grief therapy
by now." He thought my visits were
prolonging the inevitable. He claimed
I should "let her go," and get on with
my life. Sometimes I reminded him that
we were pioneers. He didn't know any
more about the new field of Perpetual
Donors than anyone else did.

The hardest part was watching Mom's
hands change from strong and competent-
looking to pale and limp. Still, it
comforted me to sit and stroke her
fingers.

In May I went to see her on my
seventeenth birthday. It was hard to
talk normally. Just a few weeks later
I graduated from high school. Though
I didn't win any awards or scholarships,
Dad said he was proud of me, and I knew
Mom would be too if she could have known
what was happening.

That summer I worked full-time at
the discount store and then entered
junior college in the fall.

37

Things went along pretty much the
same, and then in the second quarter of
my freshman year, I took Sociology.
Signe Harper was a great teacher. Our
sessions covered everything — ethics,
abortion, euthanasia, even the fast-
developing medical technology. Ms.
Harper presented challenging lectures,
but she respected our opinions too, and
never put anyone down for arguing with
her. Though I had a special interest
in the subjects we studied, I had no
intention of revealing Mom's situation
to the other students.

I'd told Signe Mom's body was still
alive. I was happy they'd found each
other, and even dared hope we might
eventually become a family. But after
Signe left that night, I knew I had to
speak up. "She knows about Mom, Dad.
Everything. "

"Why, Laurie,
have to tell her?
ghouls . "

why? Why did you
She must think we're

'But she doesn't, Dad. She doesn't

judge,

One day after class I sounded Ms.
Harper out, then asked if we could have
lunch. Within a week I'd told her the
whole story. She asked questions, but
didn't seem shocked. Until that moment,
I hadn't realized how much I needed
someone I could talk to.

Dad shook his head. "We did the
wrong thing, baby. Not you or Randy.
Me. It was my responsibility and I made
a terrible mistake. I never should have
allowed her into the Donor Program.
Euthanasia might have been an answer at
the time. But it wouldn't be right now.
Now it would seem like murder."

After that I often stayed after
class, and Ms. Harper and I discussed
music, books, what I planned to do after
college. Once she had me over to her
apartment where I saw a picture of her
husband who'd died. It was obvious she
still cared for him. She was only
thirty-nine, but said she didn't mind
being single.

For me it was like finding an older
sister, or maybe another mother, though
I didn't feel guilty of betraying Mom.
I still went to see her every week and
even told her about Signe.

One night I asked Dad if I could
invite someone for dinner. He grunted.
"It's your kitchen. Invite anyone you
like."

From the start I could see Signe
and Dad were drawn to one another. At
first I don't think Dad even thought of
her as a woman, but simply someone easy
to talk to. It got to be a habit — her
coming over for dinner about once a
week. Little by little, Dad seemed to
be coming out of his state of with-
drawal.

One night he and Signe talked about
the ones they'd lost. Dad didn't know

I ran to Dad and wrapped my arms
around him.

"They made it sound so noble." His
voice broke. "And it's not. It's not
at all. It's nothing like they prom-
ised." We stood there a long time, both
of us crying. I guess it was the most
helpless I've ever felt in my life.

As time passed, I watched the
change in Dad. Little by little, he
began taking an interest in things.
Once he even suggested a menu I should
fix when Signe was coming over.

One night when the two of us were
doing the dishes, he hesitated, then
cleared his throat. "I've asked Signe
to marry me, Laurie, and she is con-
sidering it. There's just one thing.
She insists on seeing your mother."
Dad stabbed the dish towel into a glass.
"I'm against it. I can't believe any
good will come of it. I dread it almost
more than I can tell you."

I rinsed another glass and put it
in the rack. "I know, Dad." What else
could I say? To me Mom was still alive.
But I knew Dad didn't feel the same.

38

"I just can't bear to see her,
Laurie. I'd rather remember the way she
used to be." Tears shimmered in his
eyes. "I still love her, baby. And
yet, I love Signe too. Will you go with
us to the hospital? I think it would
help. "

Of course I said I would.

That Saturday afternoon in the car,
It was pretty quiet. By the time we got
to the long corridor of the donor wing,
no one was talking at all.

In Mom's ward, I glanced first at
her and then at Signe. I tried to see
Mom from a stranger's eyes. Her should-
er length hair had been cut short, and
waved softly. Even though she wore no
makeup, I was afraid her face looked a
little artificial, kind of like a manne-
quin or a statue.

breaks for you and Laurie. I love you
both. But I can't marry you. Not as
long as your wife's alive."

Dad looked desperate, his hands
clenched into fists. His face was
awful. He looked first at Mom, then
at Signe. I was sure he was going
crazy. Then all the fight seemed to
go out of him. He spoke woodenly.
"Now I've lost you both." He turned,
like a man in a trance, and left the
room.

Signe waited while I hurried to
say goodbye to Mom. "We're going now.
But it's all right, Mom. I'll be back
again next week for our usual visit."
I took her hand, and it was strange, but
I swear it was kind of moist, and it
seemed warmer than when I'd held it be-
fore. I brushed her forehead with a
quick kiss, and we left.

I went quickly to the bed and took
her hand. It felt dry, as usual, and
of course there was no muscle tone at
all. "Hello, Mom," I whispered. "I
miss you. How's the ivy doing?" I
reached up and poked a finger into the
soil around the plant over her head.
It was properly moist, but not soggy.
I stood near the head of the bed a
while, holding her hand and talking
softly.

Then I turned back to Dad and
Signe. His face was completely ashen
and hers had tears streaming down it.

"No, Rob," she said, shivering,
and shaking her head back and forth.
"No. This is wrong. I can't marry
you. "

Dad looked as if he would
collapse.

"I'm not a religious person, Rob,
but I believe in something. I believe
part of us lives on. The doctor says
this is only your wife's body, that
her brain is gone. But what about her
soul? Did it die in the accident? Or
is it here, in this room?" She groped
in her purse for tissues. "My heart

On the way home, Dad and I tried to
talk to Signe. I have never seen anyone
so emotional, yet so rigidly calm and
determined. When we dropped her off at
her apartment, it wasn't clear to me if
it was all over between her and Dad, or
only that she wouldn't marry him.

We had just been in the house a few
minutes when the phone rang. It was the
intern from the hospital, and he told me
the news even before he asked to speak
to Dad. "Donor Claudia Rigsby expired
from the physical aspect of her life at
3:30 p.m." He was Mr. Businesslike,
right to the end. Had we noticed any-
thing unusual? Though there would be a
routine autopsy, and a written report,
it seemed obvious she'd died of natural
causes.

He told me it was our right to view
the body, although he didn't advise it.
Then he asked to talk to Dad. I watched
my father age right before my eyes. But
there was nothing I could do.

I wanted to see Mom one more time,
so I drove to the hospital right away.
Hardly an hour and a half had passed
since we'd been there, and though she
was no more quiet than before, and her
cheeks seemed just as pink and healthy-

39

looking, I knew the instant I walked
into her room it was different.
Nothing remained of the mother I had
loved for almost eighteen years.

I couldn't bring myself to touch
the body. I just slumped on the floor
by the bed and let it flood over me —
what it felt like, losing her.

I remembered a time when I was five
and I'd lost some item I was supposed to
take to first grade. I was so scared I
decided I had to run away. Mom must
have gotten a clue from the fact I left
in the wrong direction for school, so
she followed me, turned me around, and
walked with me all the way, holding my
hand and telling me it would be okay.
She went in with me to see the teacher,
and it was okay. There were lots of
times like that oyer the years.

I thought about a terrible argument
we had when I was in junior high, and
she found out I hadn't told the truth
about trying marijuana. She might be
disappointed in me or disagree with cer-
tain actions, but the thing that drove
her to livid, ranting fury was dishon-
esty. I never lied to her again.

After a long time, I pushed myself
up from the side of the bed, and got
ready to leave. For some reason I
glanced at the ivy. I guess I thought
I should take it home. Maybe it could
serve as a memento of Mom. But I was
crying so hard I couldn't see clearly.
The plant looked peculiar, not the
right color and dry. I wiped my eyes
and put on my glasses. When I leaned
closer, I saw that the ivy was uniform-
ly brown and crisp, as if the foliage
had been on the fringes of a very bad
forest fire.

It was finally over. Mom was
gone — as dead as the papery leaves I
held. Carefully I moved from the room
with the ivy cradled in my arms. I
thought of a shady spot in the back
yard, a corner Mom had loved. Some
fuschias and ferns still flourished
there. I would give the little plant
a decent burial.

40

GROWING UP IN ALASKA IN LATE 1800' S

by Margaret S. Hughes
and June S. Dona

Our maternal grandparents S. Hall
Young and Fannie L. Kellogg went to
Alaska separately in 1878 as Presby-
terian missionaries to the Indians.
Grandfather went to Ft. Wrangell and
grandmother to Sitke as the first teach-
er at the Sheldon Jackson School for
Indians. They met in Sitka and were
married there in December 1878. Our
mother, Abby Lindsley Young, was born
September 19, 1879, the first white
child born in Wrangell. As such, she
was a great wonder to the Indians. The
chief, Shakes, gave her the name of his
mother, Ahnooktch, a great honor as the
Indians of Southeast Alaska had a ma-
triarchal society. Roughly translated
the name meant "wonder of the town."
Whenever Shakes visited our grand-
parents' house his first question
would be "Goosoo Uhklah" ("Where is
my mother?"). A second daughter,
Margaret Alaska, was always called
Lassie.

The two sisters, raised among the
Indians their parents served, were bi-

lingual from the time they learned to
talk. The Thlingit Indian language was
difficult for an adult to learn as it
involved gutterals that were formed by
muscles in the throat. Therefore, our
mother learning as a child spoke the
language better than grandfather and
often translated, at an early age, his
sermons at the mission services. She
would be seated on a stump if the ser-
vice was out of doors or on a chair
when indoors.

Grandfather had some rather unusual
ideas for his time about raising his
daughters. Because most of their child-
hood was spent on or near the water of
the Alaskan Inland Waterway he felt they
must learn to swim and be able to care
for themselves in the wilderness. They
were expected to walk or climb long dis-
tances and not lag behind their elders.
Grandmother had her own ideas. The
children should be part of the mission,
assisting with church duties, attending
all services, and assisting in the care
of the sick.

There was no physician in Wrangell,
and ministering to the sick fell to the
missionaries. Grandfather felt his in-
adequacies in this area so strongly that
he urged that the Board of Home Missions

41

require basic medical training for all
missionaries sent to the field. Our
mother had a natural immunity to disease
which made her a good aide in the nurs-
ing care required of a woman missionary.
In later life she recalled the constant
care she helped give when diphtheria
swept through the Indian community.

The two small girls growing up in
the community were constantly urged to
set an example. They were taught that
they must not believe the Indian super-
stitions or witchcraft. However, so-
cialization into the white racial ethic
was in some ways a substitution of one
set of superstitions for another. Later
they found they believed superstitions
they learned from whites.

The household of the missionary
family required many skills. Grand-
father was preacher, explorer, writer,
historian, census taker and public of-
ficial. Grandmother was teacher, mu-
sician, hostess to all travelers who
stopped in the community, nurse, and
pleader of causes. Mother became trans-
lator, nurse's aide, cook and house-
keeper. Aunt Lassie was assistant
musician, sparkling mover, cook and

housekeeper. The two girls were early
trained to take major responsibility
for daily chores. One week Abby cooked
and Lassie cleaned, the next week Lassie
would cook and Abby clean. Grandfather
said he could always tell which daughter
had which duty as Abby was a good cook
but disliked housekeeping. Lassie loved
housekeeping but was an indifferent
cook, so one week meals were excellent
and the house sparkled, the next week
nothing tasted good and housekeeping
was haphazard.

Certainly at times it must have
been a demanding childhood for both
girls, but the excitements of the peo-
ple, the place and the time more than
made up for the demands made on them.
Both retained the ability to make the
best of things, to stand on their own
two feet and sustain a wide interest in
the world around them. Their ability
to meet people, speak out with clarity
and passion, to handle emergencies,
along with their musical skill, learned
initially from grandmother, remained
satisfying parts of their lives. Re-
membering, we feel sorry for children
whose lives are restricted to what is
safe and bound by accepted custom.

42

CHILKAT DANCE TUNIC

Tlmgit Indian. Circa 1870

43

ANNOUNCEMENTS

WE GET MAIL!

Among the hundreds of items to hit
our mailbox there are some surprises:
would The Creative Woman be interested
in "socially sensitive investment?" The
Calvert Social Investment Fund offers to
handle your financial investments in a
way that will let you live with your
conscience. They will not buy stocks
that are associated with environmental
damage, nuclear energy, weapons nor will
they invest in South African companies.
"Don't nice guys finish last?" "On the
contrary," replies Calvert, citing their
performance. For further information
about investment companies that present
Capitalism with a Human Face, Michael
Brody's "Pure-Play Investments" in
Barron's , January 24, 1983. It is not
likely that this quarterly will begin to
run financial advice, but our readers
should know that the market includes
those who share our values: preserva-
tion of the environment, protection of
life, resistance to war, alternatives
to nuclear power, the holistic health
movement, and encouragement of human
liberation.

C.A.r.F.

Chicago Area Faculty

For a Freeze on

The Nuclear Arms Race

Join
Your Colleagues

NOW

• • • there may BE
no later . • .

44

11th ANNUAL CONFERENCE
MICHIGAN WOMEN'S STUDIES ASSOCIATION

APRIL 16, 1983

WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN

SEX
DISCRIMINATION

IN A NUTSHELL

By CLAIRE SHERMAN THOMAS, J.D., University of Michigan. Lecturer, University
of Washington. West Publishing Co., Nutshell Series, St. Paul, Minn. I 982
ISBM 0-3U-65663-J* Soft Cover $7.95

CONCISE, complete survey of sex discrimination law, ^00 pages

TABLE of 500 cases, Supreme Court, state and regional citations

EMPLOYMENT: Title VII; Equal Pay Act; sexual harassment; comparable worth

EDUCATION: Title IX; single sex schools; sexbiased texts and materials

EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENTS: experiences of sixteen states

CRIMINAL LAW: draft registration; rape; prostitution; domestic violence

REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: abortion, sterilization, product liability

Women and the Law in Washington State

prepared by NORTHWEST WOMEN'S LAW CENTER, a nonprofit organization with

the sole objective of securing equal rights for women through law
Madrona Publishers, Inc., Seattle

Both books available: from your bookstore or from Northwest Women's Law
Center, 701 Northeast Northlake Way, Seattle, WA, 98105 (206) 632-8^60

45

EDITORS COLUMN

ISSN 0736-4733

ON THE STATE OF THE QUARTERLY

While this publication continues to
grow very slowly in number of paid sub-
scribers, there are other indices of
growth that continue to extend our
voices and increase our visibility. We
think that it is significant that thir-
teen libraries have added us to their
serials collection. We are archived in
ten women's studies programs and femi-
nist organizations in this country and
one international archive in Amsterdam.
We exchange complimentary subscriptions
with 19 other small presses and feminist
magazines. Our subscribers live in 37
states and six foreign countries. Thanks
to the expertise of librarian Elizabeth
Ohm, we are now indexed, or have applied
for indexing in Ulrick's International
Periodicals for College Libraries, Wom-
en's Studies Abstracts, and the Inter-
national Directory of Little Magazines
and Small Presses. Bill Katz , of the
Library Journal , has informed us that
he will review The Creative Woman in a
forthcoming issue. In a review by Bruce
Allen, The Christian Science Monitor
described us as one of the best of the
little magazines and wrote, "The real
point ... is the spirit of gritty re-
sourcefulness that keeps these vital,
valiant, necessary publications going."
Thanks, Mr. Allen! And one more sign
of maturity is the assignment by the
Library of Congress of an ISSN (Inter-
national Standard Serial Number) which
will appear henceforth on the masthead
of every issue, and which means that we
will be cataloged and included in many
data bases throughout the United States.

What we need, as well as "gritty
resourcefulness," to maintain the publi-
cation of this quarterly, is many more
subscribers and friends who will also
make a donation to this cause. If each

reader will order a gift subscription
for a friend, our paid subscribers will
jump from 260 to 520. And for those who
wish to support us with a donation, we
ask that you make the check payable to:

The GSU Foundation

Please be sure to identify your gift as
"restricted donation for The Creative
Woman. " For donors of $25 or more we
shall send as a token of our thanks, a
framed print from our collection of
feminist art and art of special appeal
to women. To receive your free framed
print, simply advise us of your choice
from among the following sets: Judy
Chicago's Dinner Party, Contemporary
American Women Artists, Botticelli's
Primavera, or Sierra Club Wilderness
photographs.

You will receive our heartfelt
thanks, your framed print, and the
good feeling that The Creative Woman
will continue to publish the thoughts,
ideas, works and dreams of women and
that you had a hand in making it
happen. ^

46

THE MERCHANT OF VENICE

Act IV Scene 1

Portia: The quality of mercy is not strain' d;
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice bless'd;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:

Miss Laura Keene, New York, 1859

«flfeS©(?Dfe©

Make checks payable to The Creative Woman/GSU.
Please send me The Creative Woman for one year. Enclosed is my check or money order for $

$ 7.00 regular subscription

$ 9.00 foreign subscription

$10.00 donation and automatic subscription

$15.00 institutional subscription

Return to: The Creative Woman

Governors State University
Park Forest South, IL 60466

Name

Address
City

.State.

-Zip.

The
, CreatrOe
^?oman

Nonprofit Org.
U.S. Postage Paid
Park Forest South, IL
Permit #178

Governors State University
* Park Forest South, IL 60466

[I

ft*

CI

s^Jk

ft

•fH

«-/